Question

***Physical Chemistry Question*****

The concept of entropy, and the second law of thermodynamics have often been used (usually misused in reality) to “explain” all kinds of things. It is frequently up to chemists to set the record straight in such cases. One argument which has been used to “disprove” evolution goes something like this:

Living beings are more complex than nonliving systems. Furthermore, humans are more biologically complex than lower life forms such as monkeys. Entropy is a measure of randomness, the opposite of complexity. The evolution of life from nonlife, or of a more complex organism from less complex ones, must then increase the organizational complexity and thus decrease the entropy. The second law of thermodynamics tells us that in a spontaneous process the entropy must increase and can never decrease. Therefore spontaneous evolution, either as the ultimate source of life, or in the development of more complex living systems, is impossible.

From a thermodynamic perspective, this statement is fatally flawed. A. Carefully explain why it is fatally flawed. B. What would a correctly applied entropy argument say about evolution?

Answer 1

a)

note that we must understand that this concept of increasing entropy is based on the whole universe

that is, the total universe entropy

if we compare the galaxies and lots of stars/sun being transformed, they contain lots of chaos/entropy

if we compare it (molar/mass) to the entropy of an organism, the overall entropy of the unvierse will keep being larger and increasingly.

the flaw = ignore the surroundings, i.e. the whole universe

b)

counterargument will be --> include examples such as stars, or the solar system itself, exmple can be the sun fusion/fissions